Share to linkedin
Many food companies say they’re working to reduce their environmental harms, but at least according to this report, the publicly available data suggests otherwise. This year, the FAIRR Index has analyzed the sustainability efforts ofacross nine different categories, including greenhouse gas emissions, water pollution, food waste, conditions for workers, antibiotic use and animal welfare, and in many cases found company efforts lacking.
Only 30% of these companies have disclosed the specific steps they’re taking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, for example, and the outlook on deforestation isn’t much better. Fifty of the meat and dairy companies whose soy or cattle supply chains rely at least in part on deforested land scored an average of only 8% on addressing deforestation risks. Worse, none of the fifty have made a public deforestation policy commitment for soy or cattle.thanks to the trade war with the U.S.
Animal welfare also continues to be a problem. The report finds that “meat companies score an average of 22% on welfare commitments and even lower, 14%, on third-party auditing and assurance of welfare.” In addition, 83% of the companies surveyed have no “human rights due diligence processes to identify, prevent and remedy human rights abuses in business operations.”
There are several global companies that fared pretty well by the report, including three European aquaculture companies: Lerøy Seafood Group, Mowi and Bakkafrost. These companies have made significant strides in disease prevention and decreased antibiotic use in their fish stocks.
Factory farms need to be banned.
What we need to do more of is buy more locally produced goods from local farmers, which would trigger several local and regional benefits.
They don't care
‘Protein conpanies’ Slaughterhouses that kill billions of animals so fat people can get diabetes and cancer
$BYND